Unusual Vietnam Hueys

Jon and Chief,

  So your telling me I can't believe an article printed in the Army's own aviation journal.  If that's the case, I can't really believe ANYTHING anyone says about this now can I?  How do I know that the info you guys have isn't also forged or made up?  Maybe the TOW never flew in Vietnam at all and the photo of the 1st CATT is a clever forgery!   Perhaps this was a clever PR campaign to promote the TOW/Cobra  Attack Helo  Project. After all, the kill percentages sure were amazing (50-60%) compared to the SS-11  (~15% I think).  Jon,. good luck with your book, you better find all the guys alive who actually participated in this thing and pick their brains fast!  If I seem frustrated by all the shennanigans, it's because I'm frstrated with all the Shinnanigans.  Not you guys, just the data I've got to work with.  By the way, why, after all these years wouldn't Redstone mention that the Germany test was bogus?  Seems kinda silly to keep spreading propaganda like that for so long.  And to even provide a link to the PDF file seem a bit much!

    Ray
 

I will say, after reading the McInnish article, I'm REALLY skeptical.  We have a brand new weapons system that we've never test fired from a helicopter before and we're gonna let the Germans (who don't even fly B model Hueys at this point) shoot our first missiles? 

I'm calling Shennaningans on this one.

Jon 

Don't you know a censored and doctored photo when you see one? Both 553 and 554 came from aircraft on the line at Ft Lewis. Also remember we have seen setup and test firings WITHOUT the Strela in Vietnam. That photo is the civil 261 with a doctored serial and accounts for the artists images you found in the National Guard Magazine dated 1966.  Come on guys, lets not invent history. NOTHING took place in Germany. EVERYTHING took place in California. SECURITY precludes any of the shennanigans alluded to in the "magazine".

Chief Snake 

Ray,

The second team arrived in-country in June, but weren't declared operational until August.  The document I got the TOW history from is the official VHPA history written by Mike Sloniker.  I'll be seeing Mike in November and I'll talk to him about it a bit then.  The FM antenna issue wasn't necessarily that they were removed in the states, just that they were removed before it got to Vietnam. 

Judging from the photos we do have, I would say that they both arrived in country with the Strela kits on them.  I'm certain that the kill marks were painted on the birds when they were with the first team.  We have pics from the end of May that confirm it (group shot with chalkboard kills and both helicopters) and other photos from that period (with fewer kill marks) where the toilet bowl is clearly visible. 

I'll tell ya bud, you turned my whole project on its ear last night with the posting of that pic of 62-12553. I just don't see how the bird in the museum could be anything BUT that helicopter! Would the Army have let go one of its two TOW birds?  It makes sense that that bird is in the museum and the fact that it still has the TOW system fitted to it would seem to be proof enough!

Ugh... gonna be a long day.

Jon 

EDIT:  I just looked over the TOW Article by Hughie McInnish.  We've got pics of him in Vietnam in May 72 and he was the "team leader" with the 1st Airborne Team.  Glad to see more info from him.  I'm going to start trying to contact former team members so we can get to the bottom of this! 

Jon,

  Here's the link to the Redstone TOW chronology:

http://www.redstone.army.mil/history/tow/tow_chronology.html

Check June 1972. This is when the site claims that the 2nd CATT went operational, not August.  I don't know if their right, but I was hoping that Redstone knew the skinny on their own systems!  The link to the March 1972 Army Aviation Digest article featuring 553 with antennas is also in the chronology.  You will see that the article is about the first real tests of the XM-26 system which occurred in Germany.  There is no caption for the 553 pic so I don't know if it is stateside or in Germany. The article does mention that 5 systems were created.  I can only go by photos and text that I have access to, but things don't look as cut and dry as we might like to believe.  Where did you get the 4500 page document with the TOW pic you posted earlier?  Also, You and Chief seemed so positive about the FM antenna being removed from 553 in the states.  What is your source for that info?  I just want to get to the truth as best as it can be known here.  I thought we had it all worked out, but now I ain't so sure!

  Another question: according to my reading, the first Strella misssiles were used in June '72 to down 4 AH-1G's.  The anti-strella package wasn't installed till afterwards on the AH-1.  Does that mean that the entire first campaign by the the 1st ABN TOW team could have occured without the toilet bowl installed?  Since the photo of the group afterward is dated May 27, it seems reasonable that the anti-strella kits hadn't been installed yet.  Do you know for certain when the anti-strella mods were made? 

    Ray
 

Oy Vey!

62-12553.  That's a problem.  

The data plate and the aircraft both read 60-3553.  I'm gonna have to look further into this.  May have to go back down to Rucker to climb through the bird again.  Unless I misread the data plate, but I'm 99% positive it was 60-3553 just like on the tail and side.  

As for the 1st or 2nd CATT, I believe it is a misnomer.  The first team in-country was the 1st Airborne TOW Team.  They did the initial firings in May of 72 and conducted ops through July.  The original crews went back to Ft. Ord and the second batch of crews trained up and commenced ops in late August 72.  According to their CO, they changed the name to the 1st Combat Aerial TOW Team at that point.  To further complicate things, later in the year they split into two detachments.  One bird staying in MRII (554) and one going down to MRIII (553) to conduct ops there.  They did come back together at some point and did leave the country together at the end of January as Ray mentioned.   

What are the chances that both 60-3553 and 62-12553 were both used with the XM-26 system?  They are both valid UH-1B tail numbers, but my instinct says slim to none.   

Interestingly, 62-12553 is apparently registered in Chile as CC-CMK and 62-12554 is on display at Andrews AFB... right down the road from Chris and I here in Maryland.  

The plot thickens!

Jon

Jon and Chief Snake,

  I was just reading through the TOW chronology and noticed that 553 and 554 were in cuntry until January 28, 1973.  Is there any chance that some of the pictures we posted earlier of the multiple cammo patterns were of the 2nd CATT?  If not, have either of you seen pics from the 2nd CATT?

          Ray

Guess what I found.  Proof that 553 HAD FM antennas on the nose during it's TOW test days at least!  I was truly psyched by this one.  By the way, check the tail number closely, it looks like 21something553.  I guess that's where the tail number mix up started! :

" border="0" />

Grandad,

  Holy crap that looks cold!  How did Hueys perform in the cold weather?  Did you guys have any unique equipment onboard to deal with freezing temperatures?  Thanks for the pics, by the way.

      Ray

While not unusual, these are photo's of the Huey's the flew the crew of the USS Pueblo to freedom in december, 1968. Photo's where taken early that morning.

XM26 armed NUH-1Bs are certainly very interesting modelling subjects, so here are some cockpit  line drawings of the XM26 NUH-1B I found in 1969 Attack Helicopter Gunnery field manual (FM 1-40):

I hope these will be of help to anyone building a NUH-1B TOW bird. Say Jon, did You take any photos of the TOW bird cockpit? And if so, could You post them when You find time?

Marko 

grandadjohn wrote:

Cobrahistorian wrote: Oh man... to have been in the PAARNG when they flew UH-1Ms and OH-6s....  Guess I'll just have to put up with the AH-64A. Jon  Jon, now that you're rated, just make some friends with Marine pilots and get yourself a fam flight

Cobra front seat, here I come!  That'd be too cool.  I know a couple guys who have done that.

Cobrahistorian wrote:

Oh man... to have been in the PAARNG when they flew UH-1Ms and OH-6s....  Guess I'll just have to put up with the AH-64A. Jon

Jon, now that you're rated, just make some friends with Marine pilots and get yourself a fam flight

Oh man... to have been in the PAARNG when they flew UH-1Ms and OH-6s.... 

Guess I'll just have to put up with the AH-64A.

Jon 

Well, the site could be in error about the NUH-1M as the serial is totally different between the now known C serial and the M in question. But I have to say that the accuracy of that imformation on the site is extremely good. If the #105 stayed a C until it was cycled out to be replaced by an M for continued testing toward the eventual AH-1 system then it fits the logic of using the best thing you can get when testing. The N designation obviously means involvement in a special test scenario since it has popped up on a different series airframe. But so far the bulk of the N designation was geared at the TOW development. The most modern designation progressed to M which is now associated with special operations oriented aircraft. Logical, but unproven.

And, I have found gaps in the site data which are largely the fact that no data was reported. The #105 could well have gone on to get a -13/M upgrade but the organizer of the site hasn't uncovered the confirmation of that. My experience with the C's is that the ones remaining in use the longest were all eventually Ms. Again, logic says that a retiring airframe doesn't need an upgrade and the highest upgraded airframes may have been all that were required to fill the force. One of my good friends was in the MDARNG Air Cavalry unit into the 80's and they were flying UH-1Ms. In the late 80's I got to FTIG and the PAARNG had both Oh-6's and UH-1Ms at that time. When I stopped my active TPU in 1996, both MD and PA had lost their OH-6 and UH-1M airframes and were flying AH-1F airframes. 

Chief Snake 

Jon,

  I was hoping that 105 would be listed as one of the aircraft from it's lot that got the -13 upgrade, 101, 107, and 110 wer listed as recieving th UH-1M upgrade, but not 105.  Perhaps it is an error, but as I said, barring some evidence, I think it has to be assumed that she stayed a UH-1C. 

   Ray
 

Chris,

Either that, or 105 was given a -13 engine at some point and became the NUH-1M?  From documentation, we know there were 5 XM26 systems made.  But were all actually fitted on aircraft?

Jon

Ok, there are now four involved in TOW testing activities that have been tagged to the initial and Cheyenne program. What about #5, the NUH-1M? Only my guess but perhaps that airframe was used in evaluating the continued development that eventually became the AH-1 modification.

Chief Snake 

Ray,

Yes, that is 261 as far as I can tell.  Matches up pretty well with the pic I posted yesterday which we know is 261.  (and there's no camo!)

Jon

rotorwash wrote:

Andy,  you ALSO speak Russian!      Ray

Yeah...Thats a side effect of living in Russia for 23 years))))

 Andy

  Thank you very much gentlemen!

  Jon - I would love to see walkaround of 553!

Andy

Jon,

  If I understood you correctly, this is 261 firing from the single TOW launcher?

" border="0" /> 

Andy,

  That sounds GREAT!  I'm all for sending the HUEY message global.  I know she has fans in Canada, England, Austalia, and other parts of Europe. Why not Russia?  To think besides being an INCREDIBLE builder, you ALSO speak Russian!  Good luck and keep us posted! 

    Ray
 

Andy,

Sure!  Just give credit where its due!  If you need pics of the XM-26 armament system, just let me know.  I shot a full walkaround of 553 at the Army Aviation Museum. 

Jon 

  Are you kidding? :-))

I've been glued to this thread since the very begining and I have to admit - this is the most interesting thread I have ever read! I cant describe my apritiation to you guys for bringing out all this information on Vietnam Hueys! Outstanding reference!

   One question to everybody

Do you mind if I translate all this into Russian for Dishmodels.ru so that all helo fans on the other side of the Globe be able to see and enjoy this???  Of course there will be a link to this original thred so that all the rights will be reserved.

  Andy

Andy,

  Have you looked at the last three pages of this thread?!  "Holy Mother of Helicopters"  I LIKE it!

    Ray
 

  Holy Mother of Helicopters!, that would be an extrimly cool conversion for that TOW Huey! Do you have any other photos of this system? I hope its not classified anymore :-))

   Andy

Jon,

 Alas, I don't have 3566 or 3567. I missed that CD!  Here is a little better idea of what I see in the pictures.  I have intentionally reversed the photo of the toilet bowl and I am not saying these two are the same aircraft.  i just think the firing TOW bird has an unpainted cowling.  Maybe there is some cammo there and it is just light.  i won't belabor the point. I just thought it was interesting.:

[/img]

Ray,

Take a look at PN3566 and 3567.  They're black and white, but you should be able to make out something of the cowl camo on 553.  The shot of 554 firing the missile, I took that darker band on the cowling to be camo and the lighter shade that dominates most of it to be the lighter tan shade.  Not 100% sure on that, but that was my hunch.

Jon